Check out lines 52-54! "OBMs have a greater potential for negative environmental impact, partly because they do not disperse as readily". It's true that OBMs also contain a greater number of additives, but that's not cited as a reason they are more damaging.
Naryan-ShukleJanuary 21, 2022
Hey @Tyler808,
This is a textbook research question, an increasing scarce breed of RC question. The prompt tells us it's passage B specific, so really all there is to do is skim that passage for evidence.
(A): This is it! Directly supported by the passage starting at line 51.
(B): This is simply wrong. OBMs have higher concentrations of barite, not bentonite. (48-55)
(C): Tricky. Line 50 starts by saying OBMs have higher number of additives. THEN it goes on to say the things that make OBMs environmentally damaging. We have no indication additives are one of those things.
Ex: Sarah is different from Mark, as she is a girl, Mark is a boy. But Sarah is a worse student than mark because she is lazy.
Would it make sense to say Sarah is a worse student than Mark because she's a girl? Obviously not! If you can understand the absurdity of this logic, you can see why C is wrong.
(D): Sure, OBMs are used for deeper drills. What does this have to do with environmental damage?
(E): What? When did anybody ever mention recyclability? We have no knowledge of this whatsoever, and so can't make any educated comment.
